Courtesy of photo services
The committee investigating Anthony Whittington’s allegations of racial discrimination against Professor Robert Morley has concluded its investigation. While the committee’s findings were not made public, School of Engineering Dean Christopher Byrnes reported the findings to Whittington, and stated that the committee was satisfied by Morley’s explanation for his conduct.
Byrnes wrote that the committee thought that Morley “had legitimate explanations for all of the incidents,” and qualified his remarks by adding that the committee “could not see into [Morley’s] heart and thus could not eliminate any possibility that he was influenced by inappropriate considerations, including race.”
The letters also offered an apology for the distress the controversy has caused Whittington and suggested ways to remedy the situation.
Morley stated that he is unable to comment for this article because of federal laws that prohibit professors from discussing student matters.
In his complaint, Whittington claimed Morley gave him an unfairly low grade in Digital Systems Laboratory (EE455) because Whittington is an African-American. To support these claims, Whittington cited as evidence a story about a black reverend that Morley told, a comment Morley made that magic would not get students through the class, Morley’s recommendation that Whittington drop the class and take the night section instead, and the fact that Morley changed the value of the midterm exam after that test been taken and graded. Regarding the joke about the black reverend, Byrnes indicated that he did not believe that Morley “meant his use of the anecdote to be injurious or insulting to [Whittington], but I do understand that [Whittington] heard it that way.” Byrnes also wrote that Morley “needs to be more careful about offending students-intentionally or unintentionally.”
Morley’s comment about magic, Byrnes wrote, was “intended, perhaps ineffectively, to make a separate point – that there had to be a physical explanation for everything that happened in class.”
Morley’s suggestion that Whittington take the class at night school and drop Morley’s section, Byrnes wrote, was understandable, because the night section was intended for students who, like Whittington, had not taken the proper prerequisites for the class. In addition, Byrnes wrote that a student in EE455 the previous semester complained that “his partner had been a burden because the partner lacked the pre-requisite.”
Byrnes added, however, that this incident revealed the inconsistency of the Electrical Engineering department in specifying prerequisites for classes. In the future, Byrnes wrote, he intends “to ensure that EE makes the prerequisites for EE455.clear.”
Byrnes acknowledged that Morley’s decision to change the value of the midterm exam after grading it had a harsh effect on Whittington and other students who performed poorly on the exam.
To ensure that Whittington feels his grade for the class is justified, Byrnes stated that he is convening another committee of Engineering professors. According to Byrnes, three department chairs will review the data from the class “and then award each student the best of the various appropriate grades.” Byrnes noted that with this system, Whittington’s grade could only increase.
Finally, Byrnes addressed Whittington’s concern that filing the complaint has distracted him from his current courses. To remedy this situation, Byrnes offered Whittington the opportunity to withdraw from any current classes without showing a withdrawal on his transcript. Byrnes also extended Whittington, a senior, an invitation to receive a full scholarship in order to complete his degree “under less stressful circumstances” over the summer or next fall.
Whittington’s attorney, Anthony Gray, said that he was dissatisfied with Byrnes’ letter.
“The Dean’s letter referring to the committee’s report was totally unacceptable. It’s the most ridiculous thing that anybody could write in response to the allegations that Anthony has lodged,” Gray said. “I wasn’t satisfied and neither was Anthony. In fact, he was infuriated by the reaction of the Dean and the University itself.”
Gray was particularly angry that Byrnes would not show Whittington or Gray the actual report issued by the faculty committee.
“When I requested the committee report, the response I got was [that] the committee report was confidential, and it’s going to remain confidential,” Gray said. “To me, the obvious reason for that is because there’s something they’re trying to hide.”
Because he and Whittington are disappointed by Byrnes’ attempt to resolve the situation, Gray said that he plans to continue pursing the case. At this time, Gray said that he believes there is an 85 percent chance that he will file a federal lawsuit on Whittington’s behalf against Washington University and Morley.
Before he can do that, Gray said the legal system required him to file a complaint with the U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights. Gray said that he submitted this complaint on March 11 and expects a response before the end of the summer.
According to James McLeod, vice chancellor for students and dean of Arts and Sciences, the School of Engineering committee was formed after Whittington met with Byrnes to file a complaint against Morley. It was composed of faculty members from within the School of Engineering.
Contact Jonathan at [email protected]